Guilds, Guilt and Gold
Hey folks, it took me some time to get over my anger and rage about some of the discussions I had to read in the past weeks. Therefore this is my first post in 7 days. I guess I cooled down, thought a lot and settled myself...
I will really try to stay objective and reasonable. And I surely don´t want to offend someone. My only hope and the goal of this post is to wake up some people from either "side". My inspiration was and big respect goes to @schattenjaeger and his post. I do not agree with all of his views and I couldn´t afford to "opt out" like he did.
Let me state something first: We are in this (Steem) together and I hope and think that most are working and arguing for themselves (which is natural) but also and probably in the first place for something that most would call the "greater good" of Steem.
Instead of "opting out", I am a very big fan of "zooming out" and to try grasping the bigger picture. Even if it hurts (mostly both, myself and the people that can´t or will not see this bigger picture)
Also I will try to keep my explanations simple (although the thoughts behind them are quite complex at times, so please excuse me if I stripped this text down to a comprehensive (and MUCH shorter) level and for this reason left out some nuances some may consider missing)
What is profit and what is a reward
I guess it is safe to say that there are different kinds of rewards and that different people may differ about what profit is. For me profit is the reward in relation to the "invested" time. Most people will stop doing things when the relation between reward and invested time is not in balance. The rewards on Steem for me are: The money (as for most), the attention, the certitude that what I write down to the blockchain will be censorship resistant stored and it will be very prominent on Google. A very big (and most of the time 100% ignored) reward is the feeling someone gets, helping another human. And last but not least I count it as a reward seeing this amazing project grow and to be a part of it.
What is the reward pool
The reward pool is the amazing "pool" that is provided by Steem and all of those believing and investing their time, their money and their ideas in this great System. Growing value of the System will also grow this pool which is distributed on a daily (probably soon on a weekly) basis. I hope everybody is able to see the difference to the explanation @gavvet provided some days ago. He is expaining there what "the pool" is and what it is for. He probably did a good job explaining it, but still he reduces this pool to the money. I hope to have clarified, that there is much more to it...
For what is this reward pool?
@gavvet also provides an explanation for what this pool is to be used ,and why this is so. His maths and his explanation look sound at first glance. Still I felt that there is something missing or wrong. He is pointing out that the pool is "payment" for contributors, so that authors, devs, marketers, promoters, helpers, curators etc. will get their share from this pool. Actually this is a good point. BUT this is not how Steemit is perceived by those who contribute. Especially not after @dantheman ´s post about blogging in the long term.
I think it is very important that @gavvet made this clarification. Also it is very human to find reasons for having advantages that are not perceived as "just".
What is the general perception?
It seems that actually there is a big discussion about fair distribution. This is everywhere, not only on Steem. Let´s say that this is a social concern, so it is no wonder finding this concern on a "social platform" as well. As soon as there is money involved, those not profiting as much as others will "Call for Justice".
What is perceived by new people and by outsiders:
A lot of money is "distributed" for mediocre content, even for pure and utter bullshit. (Sorry @gavvet , again I take you as example and I have to point out that this is no hate or anger neither greed or envy. I could have taken other "big names" and other posts. This is only one (perfect) example out of hundreds that are seen by "noobs and outsiders" and I hope and believe that you "can take it" )
People join with the impression that they can earn really big by contributing better content (which does not seem so hard at all). This is not true and everyone who is contributing longterm for Steemit knows that. As in every market there are many, many factors important for a nice payout. Timing, knowing the right people, being connected and others, OR as we know now being one of the designated curators for @ned ´s steempower in the guilds. It needs ALL of this for having a payout that would be a really good hourly rate.
If people are not aware of the other rewards, mentioned earlier and do not understand some of the hidden reasons for payouts they will very quickly become frustrated and call out for fair distribution...or just leave, which is worse.
Some simple maths
I used for this the daily stats of the steempunks website, created by @ontofractal (thx!)
At the moment about 1200 articles are contributed to Steemit by about 700 authors. The "reward pool" that is distributed daily is at 2400$. If we strip any thoughts about the factors mentioned earlier, thus not mentioning timing, reputation, other involvement and at least quality, then every of these posts is "worth" about 2 $. A post under 2 $ is below average and a post that pays out 120 $ is above average by about 5900%
It is not hard to understand that a link-drop and a line of text is "worth" less than a professional analysis, or a great poem, or an artwork, or ...
It is not hard to understand that someone with a reputation of 46 does not get the same rewards than one with a rep of 72.
If people do not know that there are other factors than the obvious, they will feel cheated. I guess that´s not hard to understand, as well.
Now there is the additional impression, that being top ranking is much due to selfvoting with steempower provided by the guilds. This is throwing a shadow on the guilds and trust is damaged. Trust in the whales, trust in the guild delegates, and trust in Steem as a system. On the other hand also the trust of those working hard for the guilds in those they have to vote is damaged. This is dangerous.
What are guilds doing and how is it perceived
In fact "Curation" is one of the single most important tasks of this system. Those voted by the guild get a nice share of "the pool" in many ways: Attention, reputation and a good feeling.
Those who delegate their steempower to the guilds "protect" the value of their Steempower. I think that Curation also helps Steemit to set a path, which content is wanted and which is not.
Some time later it was as well pointed out that the delegates of the guilds receive one guildvote on their own content as sort of payment (no idea if daily or weekly, but this is not that important). This revelation raised a lot of discussions and questions. Angry memes and posts attacking the people profiting from this arrangement. Those "in power" are suspected of cronyism and of unfair advantage-taking. One of my favourite Spiderman quotes:
"With great power comes great responsibility!"
A quick look at the official rules first
*Taken from Steem Guild and written by @donkeypong *
- Authors must be producing consistently good content which improves Steemit
YES! - Original content with no material that is plagiarized or generated by word spinners
YES! PLEASE! - Authors must have low lifetime rewards
That´s reasonable... - No Steemit related posts
Why? - No controversial posts
WTF? WHY??? - No polarizing themes or subjects (such as politics)
Again... WTF? WHY??? - No posts that are just one photograph
- Must cite sources for any non-original content (text, photo, video, etc.)
- Maximum rewards: 1 post per day per author
- Preferably people who have been in Steemit for at least 1-2 months
Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes again.
Why do I question points 4, 5 and 6...
"No Steemit related posts": This cuts ideas and development of possibilities into nothingness... In my opinion this rule is stripping Steemit from its most important resource: Brainpower and ideas from the community. As well it sends the message that contribution of ideas is not wanted or needed.
"No controversial posts and no polarizing themes": What interesting stuff remains then? I am aware that it is probably hard to vote for content that one would not support directly (even on a legal point of view). Still these rules define the path where Steemit will go from here. If controversial posts are not "wanted" (that´s the message of this rule) why use a "censorship-resistant" platform in the first place? I guess it was George Orwell who once said:
Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.
Personally and very subjectively I value more the content that opposes mine because it enriches my view on the world. Censorship free discussions are, what I came here for in the first place. From a less subjective point of view controversial themes are much more searched in Google, thus a "suppression" of those themes is again stripping Steem from one of the most important ways into the system.
MISSING: official rule for voting on own content as payment.
Suggestions for improvement
As already stated Curation is one of the most important tasks of the system and the Guilds are a good first step. Good Curation is key to further growth and thus the work done by the guilds is important and will be invaluable in case of mass adoption (hopefully soon). Payment is just and fair, but should be visibly "payment". Voting on own content as a payment distorts the percieved quality in more than one way.
This COULD (only suggesting my brainfarts) be:
- An empty post titled "Curation payment"
- An overview post on made Curations on a daily/weekly basis
- A real payment (Steempower or even Steem or SDB payed by the Steempowerholders ... lets not forget... Curation brings money as well and knowing where the guild vote will hit is worth a nice value as well)
TL, DR:
When transparency is the message and the goal of a system, then "locker-room" talk and back room politics are the death of this system.
At the end I want to thank those involved in the guilds for their important work. I really hope to contribute with my thoughts to bridge the opening rifts. Also I hope that some discussions will be following this post.
Names taken from the official Steemitguild announcement:
Ned @ned
Tom @donkeypong
Adil @the-alien
Gavvet @gavvet
Brian @hanshotfirst
Jason @jrcornel
Celia @coinbitgold
Rob @justtryme90
Jam @jamtaylor
Pfunk @pfunk
Thanks for taking the time reading!
yours
@pollux.one
pictures are CCO public domain from pixabay and the first is taken from Steem Guild
"No Steemit related posts
Why?
No controversial posts
WTF? WHY???
No polarizing themes or subjects (such as politics)
Again... WTF? WHY???"
for a quiet life, staying under radar, avoiding bad attention, not wanting to be too controversial (all kind of 'politically correct') is why I think it is said. I have seen similar rules elsewhere here.
But the biggest negative I have seen overall on Steemit, with regards to rewards, is the ability of any one member to overrule the up-voting choice of another member by flagging before payout has cleared.
But if the code allows it who is really at fault?
I am aware of that. I prefer looking for solutions instead of blaming someone.
I imagine steem being used by future whistleblowers all over the world. I cannot believe that the point is "staying under radar", at least I hope so.
Tall trees catch the most wind... not so?
I most definitely "can take it" and I sense the spirit in which it is given.
Yes, that post was "BS" as you like to call it...
But it had a purpose... It was to wipe out voting power from a downflagging bot and this one could do significant damage. It was not just auto following me and my comments but many other users as well.
Draining its power decreased its effectiveness not only on me but also on any other users it was following...
Since this exercise, that bot has mended its ways and now just does symbolic downvotes. Not full 100000 SP downvotes... Or perhaps its just doing this while recharging
You could have made it a 'decline payout' post.
I'm sure, the bot would have voted you regardless.
Too be honest... It never crossed my mind and once its posted, its posted...
You numbers are completely off... $2400 is "Liquid STEEM/SBD payouts"
That needs to be doubled to add the portion that is paid out in SP
in addition the 100% SP posts need to be added as well.
Your calculations should be based on a number closer to $7000 - $7500 at these low steem prices
Thank you for pointing that mistake out! I won´t correct it in the original article. Still the true numbers do not change much. I think it is even worse for those not votet by whales on a regular base. So average post value should be 6$ ... For someone who has an average payout of 0,30 $, a 120$ payout still seems overrated by 2000 %
I have to point out again: This is no ranting post, but a thoughtful one. Myself I get nice payouts from time to time and I work very hard for them. The discussion and the question should be: How "the pool" is shared in a way that attracts and ties the most future contributors.
If it is done in a way that destroys Steem, then it does not matter if you hold 5 000 SP or 5 000 000 SP both stacks are worthless.
It's a good discussion. But it's also getting tiring to see so many posts about this.
There's no way any of the guilds will please everyone. They each have a focus that caters to a wide group, but never an all inclusive one.
We have folks come into SteemTrail and creating drama once in a while. For some reason they think that doing so is helpful or will completely change the way we do things according to their demands.
Each guild came about as a result of addressing a perceived need or because they wanted to provide something for the community at large. SG has reasons they do what they do. The lack of politics and religion, for instance, helps them avoid assuming a position in either of these by voting for a particular segment while marginalizing another. IMO, it's a wise move, especially in light of their goals. And it's known, so if folks want to be rewarded by them or Curie then they can post accordingly. Robinhood Whale was similar, with some distinctives.
Ultimately, these guilds are free from having to do what others say. This should be kept in mind too. It's a group of people who've decided to do what they want. If they were focused on just upvoting posts that discuss hula-hoops, so that all articles about them got $200 payout, that's their right. Others might not like it, but so what? That's what a free market's about. Same goes for self-voting. Ultimately, it's nobody else's business, except in regard to whether they're going to vote for that post/comment or not.
This points to a very real concern with the consolidation of voting power. If it weren't for that, none of this would be a discussion. And, with a free market, we can't expect anyone to give that up. In fact, some decide they want steem, buy it, and become whales who can distribute a larger portion. That's just the way it's designed, so we need to learn to live with it. And we want to work with the whales as much as we're able, but remembering that they can do what they want. This isn't a democracy. It's a free market with lopsided wealth, just like everywhere else in life.
Some polemicism... I am getting tired of seeing so many food, travel and sportbetting posts.
Of course there are reasons for things being done as they are done at the moment. The question raised is, if these reasons are really "good reasons" or if there are points missing. At the end there has to be trust to where the power is delegated to. (not to vote weird stuff for instance OR for themselves ...).
"learn to live with it"
A clear NO to this point. I am a lover and supporter for free markets and free communities, to an extent only few people are able to understand. The whole point of free markets is to find the best solutions which is a constant search for balance. We have to learn that our influence to the big players may be small, but there still is one. If the interest of most whales, as I understand it atm is to growth, then controversial posts may attract more people than softened realities. Just my opinion... may be wrong... free markets to decide :-)
I like controversy, being myself quite a bit controversial in the last few years. But aren't there some guilds which would support controversial posts?
And if they don't exist, maybe they should be created.
As for me I will go on posting whatever I want hoping that there is somebody out there who actually might appreciate it.
And if the muse touches me and I temporarily feel that way, I'll also post a bit of fluff once in a while, a soft poem that gets nobody annoyed, something that might possibly earn me a little bit of money.
What bothers me a bit is the automatic flagging by bots without any explanation.
If somebody doesn't like my opinion why doesn't he just tell me.
For me the flagging seems cowardly and the automatic flagging is just malicious.
Oh, I agree. It wasn't meant to confront your post directly. Most of the posts I'm seeing about this aren't spelled out well. Yours was, which lent itself to discussion (instead of ranting and whining).
It was more of a comment on the topic in general sparked by your post, with some agreement and disagreement. :)
Thanks, glad you see it that way.
What about rule 3?
That´s reasonable...
Let's go over the list of people they are rewarding, again. Low life-time rewards? As has been said before the whales/guilds can use and allocate their stake anyway they want. Yes, they can.
I believe the intentions are good, in reality, the same accounts get voted the most rewards day after day. I am missing how that is curation which should be paid. Again, I want to say, I think the intentions were good.
If you are voting for yourself or others as a direct means of getting paid, let's take the blog out of it, and just make a post that says, "This is a payment post". That would be honest and transparent.
Well, depends how you define "low lifetime rewards"
I'm sure none have earned enough for that island yet :)
lol, true.
This is an excellent post my friend, it does need discussion but I have learned to keep my opinion to myself on most things Steemit :)
Honestly, I don't think the Big Decentralized Power Players want any opinion outside their centralized decision making process :)
Steem on brother..
Thx a lot. I really thought a lot, wether I should post this, or not. I am dependent in a way on what Steem becomes. Therefore I have at least to try shaping it a little bit to what I need...
Thank you @pollux.one - great post. I respect the integrity you show for "sorry, dude, it's just true" attitude.
My experience of steemit:
Posts 166 Revenue $363.42 Total votes 7,598.00 Comments: 954.00
Revenue/post 2.189277108
Votes/post 45.77108434
Comments/post 5.746987952
Revenue/vote 0.047831008
Without wishing to beat my own drum too hard, I wrote a news piece a couple of weeks ago - Page 1 of a Google search. It is still on page 2 and the category is NEWS! 241 votes $16.51 - my presence on those pages is worth more to steemit than $16.51
Whales do not vote for me because they know that I know.Your estmation of 5900% is well under reality. On a days steem generation, some goes to authors, some goes to curators, some goes to witnesses and there is still a some left ... why?
Upped and followed
The googe ranking is in fact one of the single most underappreciated things Steem can do. (I experienced the same with my Berkeley article ... google first page... amazing)
I think with this pitch alone you could get ANY business to be posting on Steemit.
Well done! I love hearing that kind of stuff! I was on there for Soros and Le Pen. Have been on page 2 for some Syrian articles too. They just don't get that Game Theory is counter-productive to Social Media! Not sure whether you saw my post about Guilds and votes just now or you are purely replying to my comment in your post! You get my vote anyway!
This post has been ranked within the top 25 most undervalued posts in the first half of Feb 10. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $10.14 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Feb 10 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.
Thank you for posting @pollux.one.
This topic wants discussing.
Principle...yes with great power comes great responsibility.
Thx a lot for your curation efforts. You do a most amazing work upvoting and commenting by hand! (sometimes I really think you are a bot ... and I mean this in the most positive way imaginable. Steady pace... )
Thank you for your kind reply @pollux.one.
It is bleujay's pleasure. ^_^